Hazard Identification Document: Hazard Identification Materials to Support Reconsideration of Listing: Chemicals Listed Via the Labor Code or the Authoritative Bodies Mechanism as Known to the State of California to Cause Reproductive Toxicity
This news update on the Hazard Identification Document is brought to you by OEHHA.
The Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) announces the availability for public review of a hazard identification document to support the reconsideration of three chemicals listed under Proposition 65 as known to cause reproductive toxicity. The Developmental and Reproductive Toxicant Identification Committee (DARTIC) will meet on May 21, 2014 to consider whether these chemicals should remain listed under Proposition 65 as known to cause reproductive toxicity.
Two of the chemicals, hexafluoroacetone and phenylphosphine, were added to the Proposition 65 list in 2008 and 2009, respectively,via the Labor Code mechanism.1 OEHHA is bringing the two chemicals to the DARTIC because the federal regulations that affect the basis for the original listings via the Labor Code mechanism have changed. Specifically, in March 2012, the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) amended the regulations contained in CFR2 Title 29, section 1910.1200. These changes have affected the use of this section as a definitive source for identifying chemicals as known to cause reproductive toxicity by the Labor Code mechanism.
The third chemical covered in the document, chlorsulfuron, was added to the list as known to cause reproductive toxicity in 1999 based on formal identification by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA), an authoritative body3, that the chemical causes reproductive toxicity. U.S. EPA was subsequently petitioned to remove chlorsulfuron from the list of chemicals subject to reporting under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act section 313. In its response to the petition on November 18, 2013, U.S. EPA determined that there is no compelling evidence of reproductive or developmental toxicity for chlorsulfuron. (U.S. EPA denied the petition because it determined that chlorsulfuron can reasonably be anticipated to cause toxicity to aquatic plants.)
For more information on the Hazard Identification Document, please visit the OEHHA link above. Please contact Nexreg for our Prop 65 Compliance services.
